Table of Contents
Introduction: Observing Beyond Politics
I have never been drawn to politics, parties, or grand ideologies. I have always chosen to believe more in actions than in promises, more in people’s behavior than in their speeches. Yet growing up in Nepal, it seems politics is unavoidable. I was often told, “You have to know about politics, it shapes everything.” While I may not carry deep political knowledge, I do carry years of observation, a sense of responsibility, and a concern for where our country is heading. Watching the protests of 2025, I cannot help but see patterns the same mistakes, the same anger, and the same hope, repeating over generations.
What Happened (Gen Z protest in Nepal against Corruption)?
On September 8, 2025, mass protests led by Nepal’s youth, dubbed “Gen Z,” erupted across Kathmandu, sparked by a government ban on social media and widespread frustration over long-standing corruption. What began as demonstrations quickly escalated into violent clashes with security forces as protesters stormed the parliament building. Over the course of Monday, at least 19 people were killed and hundreds injured as police used tear gas, rubber bullets, and live ammunition. In response to the unrest, Home Minister Ramesh Lekhak resigned on Monday evening.
The protests continued on Tuesday, defying curfews and taking an even more destructive turn. Protesters burned the parliament building, as well as the homes of senior politicians, including Prime Minister K.P. Sharma Oli and former prime ministers Sher Bahadur Deuba and Pushpa Kamal Dahal. Private properties, including hotels and resorts, were also targeted. The violence also included looting of banks and other properties. These acts were widely attributed to opportunists who exploited the protest for criminal gain, leading to jailbreaks and the release of various criminals, murderers, and rapists.
Despite the government lifting the social media ban late on Monday, the protests intensified, fueled by anger over the deadly crackdown and pervasive political corruption. On Tuesday afternoon, facing mounting pressure, Prime Minister Oli resigned, citing the need for a constitutional political solution.
In the wake of the protests, there is an ongoing discussion among the youth about selecting new leadership. Popular support is coalescing around independent and non-traditional figures like Kathmandu Mayor Balen Shah, Harka Sampang, and Kulman Ghising. For many Nepalis, this event feels like a familiar, recurring chapter in the country’s turbulent political history.
To understand today’s crisis, one must look backward. Nepal’s modern history is not a straight line toward progress but a cycle of revolt, reform, and relapse.
1951: The Fall of the Ranas
Nepal’s first great rupture came in 1951, when the century-long Rana autocracy collapsed under pressure from popular uprisings and external forces. The Ranas, who had reduced the monarchy to a puppet role and monopolized power, were forced out after a coalition of democratic activists and the monarchy backed by India – demanded change. This ended a 104-year-old regime and introduced democracy for the first time.
1990: The First People’s Movement
Four decades later, in 1990, Nepal erupted again. The Jana Andolan (People’s Movement) swept across the country against the Panchayat system, a party-less political order that had concentrated power in the palace. After weeks of protests and dozens of deaths, King Birendra conceded, reinstating multi-party democracy. The streets celebrated, political prisoners were freed, and a new constitution was drafted. Optimism soared.
Yet, within just a few years, that optimism faded. Parties bickered, corruption grew rampant, and governance faltered. The same leaders who had been hailed as heroes of democracy became symbols of dysfunction.
1996–2006: The Maoist Insurgency
Frustration over inequality, caste discrimination, and rural neglect triggered the Maoist insurgency in 1996. What started as a small rebellion in Rolpa escalated into a decade-long civil war claiming over 17,000 lives. The insurgency exposed Nepal’s structural wounds, the urban-rural divide, political exclusion, and weak institutions.
Here, the insurgency illustrates that revolts can be strategically organized by groups with political agendas. The Maoists exploited the frustrations of marginalized communities, turning discontent into a sustained campaign for power and inclusion. Even after the insurgency ended, former Maoist leaders shaped mainstream politics, demonstrating how revolts leave long-term political influence.
2001: The Royal Family Massacre
On June 1, 2001, the Royal Family Massacre took place.This shocking massacre plunged Nepal into political chaos, weakened public trust in the monarchy, and accelerated the rise of parties and movements positioning themselves as alternatives to the monarchy. It was a turning point that destabilized traditional power structures and reshaped the political landscape.
2005–2006: The Royal Coup and Second People’s Movement
In 2005, King Gyanendra staged a coup, dissolving parliament and consolidating power. This move exposed hidden agendas and conspiracies, exploiting political fragmentation. Public backlash led to the Second People’s Movement (Jana Andolan II) in 2006, uniting political parties, Maoists, and citizens. The king stepped down, democracy was restored, and Nepal eventually became a republic in 2008.
2008: The Republic is Born
In 2008, Nepal abolished its monarchy and declared itself a federal democratic republic. The moment was historic, the world’s only Hindu kingdom had become a secular republic through a popular movement. Hope returned once again. A new constitution was promised, federalism was on the horizon, and ordinary people believed this time the cycle would end.
But the years that followed were turbulent. Governments rose and fell at dizzying speed. The drafting of the constitution dragged for seven years. Corruption scandals multiplied. For many, democracy came to mean instability rather than stability.
2025: The Gen-Z Revolt
Now, in 2025, a new generation has taken to the streets. Sparked by a ban on TikTok and other platforms, protests quickly revealed deeper frustrations : a lack of jobs, broken promises, corruption, and alienation of youth. This was Nepal’s first digital-era revolt, mobilized not by pamphlets or speeches but by hashtags, livestreams, and viral posts.
The government fell, but so did illusions. The protests, while powerful, also revealed darker sides: opportunistic violence, arson, and vandalism. It became clear that while political systems have changed, Nepal’s civic maturity has not kept pace. Revolutions can remove leaders, but they cannot automatically create responsible citizens.
The Pattern: Why Revolts Repeat
Looking across these chapters – 1951, 1990, 1993, 1996–2006, 2001, 2005–2006, 2008, and now 2025, a striking pattern emerges. Roughly every 10–20 years, Nepal experiences significant upheaval. Each wave begins with legitimate grievances, fueled by inequality, corruption, and unfulfilled promises. Each time, leaders rise with pledges of reform, sparking hope among the populace. Yet within a decade or two, frustration resurfaces, trust erodes, and citizens return to the streets, repeating the cycle.
This phenomenon is not unique to Nepal. Across history, popular uprisings tend to occur in waves, triggered by systemic failures rather than isolated events: the European revolutions of 1848, mid-20th century decolonization movements, or the Arab Spring of 2011 all demonstrate that when governance fails, economic disparity persists, and institutions are weak, societies relapse into unrest.
Revolts do not simply correct the past; they expose the deeper structural and civic deficits that remain unresolved. In Nepal’s case, the recurring pattern reflects not only political instability but also a civic culture that struggles to hold leaders accountable and sustain constructive participation, making history less a straight line of progress and more a circular rhythm of hope, disillusionment, and revolt.
The Deeper Problem: Civic Gaps
It is tempting to blame only politicians. But Nepal’s revolts also reveal a deeper issue: the civic gap. Political leaders may be corrupt and opportunistic, but so too are many citizens when given the chance. During the 2025 protests, while some risked their lives for democracy, others looted shops, set fire to public property, and exploited chaos for personal gain.
This lack of civic responsibility undermines progress. Democracy is not just about casting votes or toppling governments; it is about citizens practicing restraint, responsibility, and constructive participation. Without civic growth, political change will always remain incomplete.
Breaking the Cycle
The threat is real: unless both leaders and citizens change, Nepal will face another upheaval within the next generation. The cycle will continue, and today’s heroes will become tomorrow’s villains.
Breaking the cycle requires two things:
- Accountable Leadership – leaders who deliver transparency, justice, and opportunities for Nepal’s young population.
- Responsible Citizenship – citizens who protest peacefully, engage constructively, and demand reform without falling into opportunism.
Civic education, community accountability, and a culture of dialogue must become as central to Nepal’s democracy as elections and constitutions.
Conclusion: Learning From History
The fall of the Oli government in 2025 should not be remembered as just another chapter in Nepal’s long cycle of revolt. It should be remembered as the moment we realized that change requires more than removing leaders. It requires transforming the way we, as citizens, participate in democracy.
History has warned us: when grievances pile up and civic maturity does not grow, revolts will return. The question is whether we are willing : this time – to learn, to change, and to finally break the cycle.